BrandNewGuy

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "But to believe that that technological advance > will continue indefinitely is simply an article of > faith on your part." > > I guess that's where we disagree. The evidence of > the last 300 years or so points all in one > direction, and it certainly doesn't support any > kind of doomsday scenario. How about looking beyond the last 300 years? History is littered with civilisations that fell once growth came up against hard physical limits. And saying "Malthus was wrong" doesn't get you round that conundrum. Mine is not a doomsday scenario - FWIW I think global industrial civilsation based on the one-off exploitation of cheap fossil fuels will decline over a couple of hundred years or so, with some plateaus, some growth and some sudden falls. Not Mad Max :-) [edited for sp]

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fracking will extend fossil fuels 'reign' by > another 50 years or so and remove the US's need on > middle eastern despots Dream on... as with most current renewable technologies, fracking takes massive inputs of energy and resources for modest returns compared to conventional oil drilling. That makes a big difference.

I agree that ingenuity helps man to overcome obstacles, but this does not mean that technology will supply us with endless answers to the neverending growth of global industrial society based on the exploitation of a highly concentrated, highly mobile source of fuel such as oil. A world where oil hits $200+ a barrel will start to look very different from ours, regardless of the development of solar, wind and wave power. Most of the green technologies that the USA and China are sniffing around are themselves dependent on high energy inputs, transportation costs etc. China's interest in electric cars is less to do with the environemt and more to do with its relative lack of domestic oil resources and a desire to fuel transportation through electricity generated predominantly by coal. Similarly in Germany, which is lauded for its (highly subsidised) alternative energy sector - check out how much coal Germany is planning on burning to keep the lights on. Not the outcome the Greens wanted...

But to believe that that technological advance will continue indefinitely is simply an article of faith on your part. No technology has thus far trumped the vast growth in fossil fuel use over the last two centuries that is simply unsustainable into the future. Indeed the progress of technology has been made possible by that growth, not the cause of it. Energy issues will ultimately make high-cost high-energy technophile 'solutions' (mega mirrors in space, mining on Mars...) look like pie in the sky.

I'm just asking a perfectly reasonable question about someone who runs a car but has problems affording to feed their family. FWIW, we're a one-car family running a crappy 14-year-old car which, when it's gone kaput, won't be replaced. It's not a personal attack, it's an invitation to question people's "must have a car" assumptions.

Those hours are for the Devon St depot - Manor Place has indeed closed. It's probably far more convenient to use Lambeth's facility at Vale Street, SE27. They now have an agreement that Southwark residents can use it...

fuzzyboots Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would be gutted to see Iceland go - and frankly, > would be forced to use my car to drive more often > to the nearest LIDL and Aldi. It saves me huge > amounts on my family food bills in comparison to > other local supermarkets. Whilst I LOVE M&S food, > it is but a mere aspiration for me and mine to > actually be able to afford it. > > Or I could stop eating, I suppose. How much does your car cost a year all told?

And Wagamama's horribly overpriced - ?9 or ?10 for a bowl of ramen? I don't think I've been in one since they stopped doing their offers. There's way better for far less than their prices. If a good value ramen/noodle/fusion-y place opened in ED, I'd try it, but it's so depressing that many people will only go to chains they've heard of. Same with coffee shops - many independents aren't very good, but some are far better than chains, but the brand-obsessed general public won't even walk through their door. Bonkers.

There's the hidden inflation of lots of consumer goods being much cheaper than they were in the past, but not lasting as long, due to being crappily made. For example, you can get a kettle for less than a tenner, but it only lasts a few years. In real terms in the past, a kettle would have cost more but lasted much longer. Doc Martens are like that too - cheaper in real terms but only lasting a year or so...

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > aquarius moon Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Pigeons are not 'vermin'. > > > > They are living creatures. > > The pigeon in London is a broadly descended from > the Rock Dove that lived on cliff faces. It is now > feral with few natural predators, altho the > increase in raptors in and around London has had > some impact. Disease is probably the most likely > cause of pigeon death and many pigeons look > disgusting with fleas, damaged limbs and beaks. > It's average life span is probably no more than 2 > - 3 years. Not true. The original poster said that is was (probably) a wood pigeon, not a feral ("London") pigeon. > With hundreds of thousands in the London area and > given that they foul streets, shop fronts, > statues. parks and al fresco eating areas they are > considered to be vermin. To expend many man hours > of council resource (whether or not according to > rch that these resources have "already" been paid > for) on savings the lives of two such birds is > just ridiculous. See my comment above... Although I suspect that the council tree people are indeed clumsy with their pollarding, I have some sympathy with their timing. Wood pigeons are almost alone in breeding nearly all year round, whereas most other species have fledged long before the end of August.

Couldn't remember the name of the cheesy 70s band Chicocry Tip for ages - then I did... obviously.

Our fan is making the room much cooler.

It wasn't me, John, but thanks for the link - absolutely fascinating.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway, the whole historical responsibility thing > aside, surely the crux is that we generally > alleviate want and poverty specifically where the > government does neglect its responsibility. > > I'm sure there were many BITE types in the mid 80s > farting on about how it wasnt our responsibility > to do anything when Ethiopia had among the highest > military spend as a proportion of GDP in the > world. > > Technically they may well have been right but > they'd have also been @#$%&. > Nothings different if you ask me. But aid to India today isn't equivalent to emergency relief to Ethiopia in the 80s. Aid is phenomenally complex in its effects - and appeals to people's kindness doesn't make it less complex.

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Beer in The Evening? Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Er, so? Opium was a widely-sought commodity in > the > > 19th century. Not forgetting that its trade was > > perfectly legal, and any profit made from it. > > Should we seek indemnity from the Wright > brothers' > > descendents, seeing as their ancestors' > creation > > has lead to so much pollution? > > Next you'll be saying that slavery wasn't wrong > because it was legal at the time. Sorry I don't > accept your point. No, the point is that we're no longer reponsible for that wrong

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BrandNewGuy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Enriching the Indian middle class is > > probably not useful to the poor. > > I thought they had tax in India too. Is this not > the case? Of course, but I bet they don't spend much of it on the poor - the infrastructure situation in India is so chronic that even the middle class won't get much richer until they spend serious money on it.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > India, as pointed out above, has huge problems > with real poverty. But at the same time it is a > country that is developing successfully. Again I think that's debatable. The burgeoning Indian middle class loves to give that impression, but so did the British middle class in the mid-1800s, amidst grinding poverty in both countryside and town...

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > India needs to develop > their industries as one of the solutions to tackle > poverty. Really? That's highly debatable. From Gandhi through EF Schumacher, the micro-credit movement and beyond, many would argue that "appropriate technology" would be most useful for the poor of India. Enriching the Indian middle class is probably not useful to the poor.

Without wanting to sound like a "when I were a lad..." old grump, when I were a lad, A-Level results day passed without comment on the news or in the papers. Nowadays, it's front page news and every last detail of how a bunch of 18-year-olds have done in their school exams is dissected for signs of hope or despair or whatever. There are several possible reasons: 1. It's an opportunity to show sexy young women jumping in the air; 2. It's the silly season - but it was the silly season thirty years ago too; 3. We're obsessed about Education with a capital E - except for The Guardian and New Society, thirty years ago I don;t think any newspaper or current affairs magazine had a separate "Education" section. So is this preoccupation with education A Good Thing? Has it led to cleverer / more employable / happier youngsters? You might have gueseed from my tone that I suspect the answer is 'no'...

Nice chip on that shoulder of yours... the OP said s/he didn't know where the dog lived, so couldn't really go and speak to the owner. But you probably didn't have time to read that, what with fighting the class war 'n' all...

From Friday's South London Press: "A man and a woman were seriously injured after a collision between a car and a motorbike in Lordship Lane, East Dulwich, on Wednesday afternoon. Traffic was brought to a standstill after the crash, which left the bike trapped against a tree. The bike rider and passenger, both 23, were taken to King's Hospital [sic] in Denmark Hill. Their injuries are not thought to be life-threatening..." So, not for the first time, gruesome hearsay on this forum is shown to be wrong. It would be good if we could just hear the facts, particularly as misinformation could easily lead to great distress for the family and friends of those involved. And saying, "Well, someone told me..." is no excuse. Social media has a lot to answer for...

maxamydus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > dogs bark its in their nature. Why not stop being > so tight and buy some ear plugs instead of wasting > time posting this on a website? Psst... want any dodgy earplugs?

US constitution: "A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." Not sure how a "well-regulated militia" means they can "rise up and overthrow their oppressors". This poorly worded clause, it seems to me, was probably intended to mean that they didn't want a standing army (understandable - standing armies to be used more against the citizenry than against external enemies) but that citizens could and should band together if the country were threatened militarily. If Americans think that that clause means any fruitcake can get hold of a gun and a mountain of ammo, then that's their lookout... along with 12,000 homicide gun deaths a year compared to about 30 here.

Before the 2006 World Cup, the Germans revolted against the corporate FIFA imposition of Budweiser and managed to get Bitburger instead. The British used to have a noble tradition of rioting over beer - maybe we should resurrect it?

HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Neil Young - stop bloody whining man. That's a piece of crap!